Obamacare: Day Six In The Senate Finance Committee

The Senate Finance Committee continued its mark-up of the America’s Healthy Future Act of 2009 on Wednesday, September 30, 2009.

President Barack Obama made a couple of very high-profile promises concerning key issues that have emerged during the August recess and in contentious congressional town hall meetings. In his September 9, 2009 address to Congress and the nation in a special session of Congress, the President said that Americans could be assured that in his version of health care reform, there would be no federal funding of abortion nor the use of taxpayer funds to cover illegal immigrants.

In the key policy decisions of the Senate Finance Committee, those promises counted for little.

Protection of the Rights of Conscience (Hatch Amendment C13)

As noted, President Obama told Congress and the nation that, “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place”. In that spirit, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) presented two amendments to remove any uncertainty and reinforce the President’s very public commitment. Sen. Hatch’s first amendment would have protected federal conscience laws; it would have prohibited discrimination against medical professionals who did not want to practice or participate in abortion and protect the right of conscience of physicians and other health care professionals, as well as officials of health care facilities, organizations, and insurance plans. Countering Senate Democrats who declared the amendment unnecessary, Sen. Hatch said the bill’s language was ambiguous, and he sought to erase all doubt in the Committee’s intentions regarding the issue. The Committee voted against Sen. Hatch’s amendment 10-13. Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME) voted with Senate Democrats against the amendment, while Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) voted with Hatch and Senate Republicans for the amendment.

Federal Funding for Abortion (c-14)

Sen. Hatch’s second amendment would have prohibited federal funds from being used for elective abortions or to subsidize insurance plans that cover abortions. Hatch provided that nothing would stop insurers from offering supplemental policies for abortion—but plans funded or subsidized by the federal government could not provide abortion. Sen. Hatch’s amendment also provided exceptions to this law in the cases of rape, incest, or danger to the mother. Hatch’s rationale was to codify official promises made on both sides of the aisle that taxpayer dollars would not fund abortions. Though the Hyde Amendment already provides for such a restriction on the use of taxpayers’ money, it must be passed every year. Sen. Hatch’s amendment would have also written the President’s promise into law. The Hatch amendment failed in the Senate Finance Committee 10-13. Senators Snowe and Conrad also crossed party lines again in their votes.

In his address on health care, President Obama also stated that, “…there are those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false. The reforms…I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.” This statement ignited South Carolina Representative Joe Wilson’s controversial outburst.

To secure the President’s commitment, Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) introduced an amendment that would require proof of citizenship in order to access federal health programs. Sen. Grassley’s amendment would have required proper identification in applying for Medicaid benefits: Medicaid applicants, or the guardian of an applicant under the age of 18, would present government-issued identification at the time of application for Medicaid or CHIP benefits. Sen. Grassley’s amendment failed by a vote of 10-13. It was a party line vote, with Senate Democrats voting against the Grassley amendment.

The President has said repeatedly that he would oppose middle class tax increases, and that, as a result of health reform, the typical American family would see a $2500 annual reduction in their health premium costs. Nonetheless, the Senate Finance Committee “mark” contains various taxes, which would be tantamount to middle class tax increases. These include taxes on insurance companies based on their market shares, taxes on drug manufacturers, taxes on medical device manufacturers, and taxes on clinical laboratories. Economists know, of course, that such additional taxes are passed on to consumers through higher insurance premiums and higher costs for drugs and medical devices. Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), and Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) proposed amendments to protect Americans against these proposed tax increases.

Sen. Enzi’s amendment would have required that- before implementing the bill’s new insurance rating rules, each state’s State Insurance Commissioner would have to certify that insurance premiums would not rise for a majority of residents. This amendment failed by a vote of 10-13 along a party line.

Sen. Grassley’s offered an amendment to strike the bill’s additional fees on health insurance plans. Title VI of the Chairman’s mark imposes a fee of $60 billion on insurance providers, which would be apportioned among all health insurance providers based on their market shares. The Grassley amendment was also defeated on a party line vote.

Finally, Sen. Hatch offered up an amendment that would have required the Government Accountability Office to certify that consumers would not pay the higher taxes imposed on health insurers, manufacturers of drugs and medical devices, and clinical laboratories. During the debate , Chairman Baucus expressed the novel belief that such annual fees would be borne by companies, and that they would not be passed onto the consumers. In that spirit, Sen. Hatch’s amendment would have codified the Chairman’s good intentions. The Committee nonetheless voted, along party lines, against the Hatch Amendment by a 10 to 13 vote.

The Senate Finance Committee, once again, has given ordinary Americans another insight into the gap between official Washington’s promises and the reality of the health care legislation being developed in Congress. Based on the President’s clearly stated intentions, on such matters as illegal immigration and taxpayer funding of abortion, it is obvious that the White House Office of Congressional Relations needs to do a better job communicating them to the Senate.

Once again, I am angered by the Democrats willingness to penalize large Companies and middle class taxpayers, while not protecting us from ambiguities in these "reforms" that leave us open to interpretation by judges, States, etc. They are really not for the people. How do we get the names of those Senators who are on this committee so that the public knows exactly who is accountable for these?

Although Obama repeats the same words, bla bla bla bla bla, his intent remains, as only the words of the bill have changed. He refuses to secure the concerns of Americans as he refuses to address those concerns through definite wording of rules. He continues his non-productive escapade of the American way…destroying all he can. What sincerity? In a bill of coded messaging?

Anything coming out of obama's mouth are as he has said "just words". He just doesn't care. Regardless of where he was born, there is nothing American about obama or those who seek to tax this great nation to death. All they see is power & control. It's all a sham. If "universal" health care will allow coverage for illegals, shouldn't ALL our elected officials be included? Why does Reid seek to exclude Nevada? Isn't it "universal"? If obama has a mandate from the people, why are the leftists "backdooring" socialism? As I've said before "get a broom, time to clean House".

Clearly we have some "honest politicians" here. If they have nothing to hide, then why not adopt the aforementioned amendments? These aren't trivial issues, and I for one don't appreciate the trivial manner in which they are being treated.

They seem to have adopted an illusion that these votes have somehow escaped the attention of the American voter. Hopefully we won't "forget" during next years elections.

Note HC Bill Analysiis With CADC Advisory Board Member,MAT STAVER of The LIBERTY Council,and Dean Of LIBERTY Univeersity School of LAW PG 58 GOV Will Have Real-Time Access To INDIVIDUALS FINNANCES And A NATIONAL ID HEALTH CARE CARD Will Be Issued. PG 59 Line21-24 GOV Will Have DIRECT ACCESS TO YOUR BANKS ACCOUNTS For ELECTRONIC FUNS TRANSFER.This Bill Also Have ACORN IN IT, Paid BY our GOV.

Don’t have time to read the Washington Post or New York Times? Then get The Morning Bell, an early morning edition of the day’s most important political news, conservative commentary and original reporting from a team committed to following the truth no matter where it leads.

Email address

Ever feel like the only difference between the New York Times and Washington Post is the name? We do. Try the Morning Bell and get the day’s most important news and commentary from a team committed to the truth in formats that respect your time…and your intelligence.